Sure, that rise in private wealth (as always overwhelmingly favouring the elites) may have been built on the backs of millions effectively being treated as industrial slaves

Those industrial slaves chose to do what they did, and their only other option was life on a farm.

Do we just magically give them all first world lifestyles? Do we just expect nations to have random wealth with no stages between? The US had a similar stage in it's own development, and China will soon see it's consumer culture driving more regulations and so on.

And that wealth growth, even if it favors the elite, has helped the poor as well. Could it be better? Yes. Could there be less inequality? Yes. However, we are better today, because of globalization, than we would be without it, and we should be happy for that fact.

effects on the environment have been catastrophic

Again, GDP increases come with environmental increases in time. China as a wealthy nation will soon realize how important the environment is, and will have an economy powerful enough to make the technology, the investments, required to preserve it.

Horses pollute a hell of a lot more than cars do, wood fires pollute more than electric heaters. Unless you want to kill off half of humanity, progress into a first world nation is better in the long run.

Yeah, that's kind of like saying that a monarchy would be a great way to run things if only it didn't rely so much on the king not abusing his position of power

Voters elected Reagan. People believed, and many still do believe, in the idea of "trickle down economics". Nothing has failed to respect the views of the people, and the consistent election of people who say "we need to increase taxes on the rich", the popularity of people like Sanders, shows that the system continues to respect the views of the people.

Just like capitalism unleashed leading to plutocrats

Capitalism replaced the system of kings and lords, you have to remember. Inequality under capitalism is far better than inequality under any system we had up to that date.

All other systems have consistently shown to not be as efficient. Even places like Sweden, who are very socialist, are testament to this.

Who gives a fuck once the economic system begins imploding for real, anyway?

The thousands, millions, of people who lose their livelihoods, cannot feed their family, and possibly lose their lives as a result?

War never stopped being wildly profitable, a great way to distract populations from domestic issues and generally a nice method of turning saturated markets into booming (re-)building opportunities.

War results in reduced wealth when you look at the net picture. The things you say here border on conspiracy theories and similar bullshit.

Meanwhile, the indicators showing that limitless growth on a finite planet, based on cheap (and toxic) energy, was a ridiculous idea to begin with

People were predicting the end of growth before the industrial revolution, they predicted it during it, and after it. We predicted it at the invention of the nuke, and when we thought the oil was going to run out. Here you are predicting it due to global warming, or finite resources feeding "infinite" growth.

Growth is not driven only by resources, it's driven primarily by energy in the modern day. With new energy sources being discovered, we can do more and more with what we have available. Growth can continue for quite some time given innovation. "We will run out of food!" was a silly statement in a world where food was about to become nearly infinite. "We will run out of copper" was a silly statement when the world was about to start using fiber for it's connections. "We will run out of oil" was a silly statement for a world about to discover oil sands and other sources of oil at higher prices. "We will run out of possible carbon emissions" is going to look silly in a world where green energy overtakes and outdoes fossil fuel based energy.

There was a time in the US where rain was as acidic as acid. Not too long later, we made scrubbers and fixed the problem. It's a long standing pattern, older than either of us have been alive, and I really doubt you have the knowledge to say this pattern is set to end.

So, yes, I will enjoy the infinite growth, I will like my ipods, and my laptops. I will live my life happy and free of guilt.

Meanwhile, you are using all these technologies, all these great innovations, while preaching doom and advocating change.

Be that change, go move into a tiny apartment, use minimal to no electricity, powered lights, AC, and so on, use public transport, and reduce your impact as much as possible.

But, it's not going to happen, because despite all your words, you do like infinite growth, you do enjoy the modern world, all it's luxury, and despite that it's "unreasonable" for you to take such drastic measures, after all "nobody else does it!" I have a suspicion it's the fact you don't actually believe what you preach that causes you to act as you likely do.

After all, if you believed in minimal impact, you wouldn't be wasting valuable resources arguing on a website, you would be out creating change, forming carbon-cheap success-maximizing relationships with other real people in the real world at every opportunity. You aren't.

Success isn't growth of material wealth, success is still being around to argue about this 20, 50 or 100 years from now

Success is defined by each and every individual, and not something you can impose on others.